Transwomen are not Women - Part 15

[Emily's Cat]

Ok, but... 'appropriateness and decency'? By what standard? Pygamas are no less decent than sweatpants, and some would say more 'decent' than the popular yoga pants. It wasn't that long ago that wearing jeans to the office was unthinkable, and go back a little further and a woman not wearing a skirt or dress in public was cause to stare. We've gotten more casual over the years, and what is appropriate and decent differs wildly across a generation or so.

And lest the mods think this off-topic, we are still flirting with the idea of changing roles and acceptability of dress in society.

Fine. You go out there are start a movement to let everyone walk around in negligees and assless chaps in public. If that's what you want, make that argument.

 

[Emily's Cat]

Ok, but whose standards are enforceable? Half the population might think it's a mortal sin to wear white after Labor Day. The other half thinks it's fine.

Oh come on, Thermal. Use some degree of common sense. I don't think it's that hard to come up with an expectation for decency. Some real basics like... don't wear t-shirts that have obscenities on them to middle schools, don't show up to a wedding in a bathing suit and snorkel, don't go to a funeral in a shark costume, don't go to work in an office wearing see-through pants and no undies.

Why are you so invested in making perfectly reasonable social expectations seem complicated and incomprehensible?

 

[d4m10n]

It's a . . . perversion of womanhood, and a perversion of sexuality.

Okay but why should anyone else care? Perversion strikes me as an argument rooted in either personal taste or Bronze Age scripture.

Is Matt Rattley causing some psychological or social harm to undergrads by dressing like a female lecturer instead of a male one?

 

[Thermal]

Oh come on, Thermal. Use some degree of common sense. I don't think it's that hard to come up with an expectation for decency. Some real basics like... don't wear t-shirts that have obscenities on them to middle schools, don't show up to a wedding in a bathing suit and snorkel, don't go to a funeral in a shark costume, don't go to work in an office wearing see-through pants and no undies.

Why are you so invested in making perfectly reasonable social expectations seem complicated and incomprehensible?

Because we are not talking about anything resembling shark costumes at funerals. We were talking about the everyday wearing of PJs in public, which is no big deal.

 

[Thermal]

Fine. You go out there are start a movement to let everyone walk around in negligees and assless chaps in public. If that's what you want, make that argument.

Must you go to foolish extremes during a discussion of what is perfectly commonplace and everyday?

 

[Ziggurat]

Okay but why should anyone else care?

Because it's a warning sign of potential danger.

Perversion strikes me as an argument rooted in either personal taste or Bronze Age scripture.

It's not. I'm rather surprised you think it is.

Is Matt Rattley causing some psychological or social harm to undergrads by dressing like a female lecturer instead of a male one?

Not previously familiar with him, but from the few pics I've seen of him on Google, he seems to be trying to dress like an ordinary adult woman. The thing in the picture theprestige commented on is NOT dressing like an ordinary adult woman. Don't pretend like statements about the latter are really about the former. They are not.

I still wouldn't want Rattley in the same bathroom as my daughter.

 

[theprestige]

Okay but why should anyone else care? Perversion strikes me as an argument rooted in either personal taste or Bronze Age scripture.

Healthful practices can be twisted into perverted forms in any age, in any value system.

Is Matt Rattley causing some psychological or social harm to undergrads by dressing like a female lecturer instead of a male one?

If he's trying to normalize his unwell urges, then probably he is.

 

[Rolfe]

Come on, Thermal. It's cowardice to go away for a few days when the conversation hasn't gone the way you thought it would go, then come back and ignore everything that happened. Agatha, who was at the 199-days demonstration, came here specifically to confirm what happened from her first-hand observation. That's valuable. It's not often we get an eyewitness coming into a thread to settle a difference of opinion. What do you have to say about her account of the events?

Do you still condemn those who brought violence to a peaceful meeting, now you know that the people who did that were the side you support?

 

[Thermal]

Come on, Thermal. It's cowardice to go away for a few days when the conversation hasn't gone the way you thought it would go, then come back and ignore everything that happened. Agatha, who was at the 199-days demonstration, came here specifically to confirm what happened from her first-hand observation. That's valuable. It's not often we get an eyewitness coming into a thread to settle a difference of opinion. What do you have to say about her account of the events?

Nothing, of course. Why do you ask?

Do you still condemn those who brought violence to a peaceful meeting, now you know that the people who did that were the side you support?

I always condemn anyone that brings violence to a peaceful protest, but none in that story were a side I support. Are you having a bit of a moment or something?

 

[Ziggurat]

I always condemn anyone that brings violence to a peaceful protest, but none in that story were a side I support. Are you having a bit of a moment or something?

Go on, pull the other one.

 

[NatalieSalat]

Trans women were mostly raised as cis little boys -- because most people aren't poli-social activists. Claiming "we were raised as nothing because of the repression" is pure deflection.

as with the Paul Denyer incident, it reminds you how the far left and the far right are more alike than either can admit.

 

[Emily's Cat]

Because we are not talking about anything resembling shark costumes at funerals. We were talking about the everyday wearing of PJs in public, which is no big deal.

Actually, we're talking about adult males walking around dressed like sexualized toddlers.

 

[Rolfe]

Nothing, of course. Why do you ask?

I always condemn anyone that brings violence to a peaceful protest, but none in that story were a side I support. Are you having a bit of a moment or something?

Evasion noted. I trust you will now cease and desist from accusing others of arguing in bad faith.

 

[Thermal]

Evasion noted. I trust you will now cease and desist from accusing others of arguing in bad faith.

If you and others argue in bad faith, as you have done many, many times, I will absolutely accuse you of such. You found me to be breifly arguing in bad faith once and you all had collective multiple orgasms over it.

You catch me trolling once and you think your off the hook for your dishonesty of the past, present, and future? Gotta hand it to you, you're one of a kind.

Eta: regarding your 'evasion noted': it was a stupid question. I acknowledged I misread, and that I trolled the ◊◊◊◊ out of it afterwards. So why would I have anything further to say?

You, on the other hand, have a year long backlog of posts I have criticized that you have yet to show the integrity to address.

 

[Emily's Cat]

Okay but why should anyone else care? Perversion strikes me as an argument rooted in either personal taste or Bronze Age scripture.

Alright, let's have a bit of real talk about "perversion". Let's go ahead and set aside the figurative framing wrapped up in prudery about exposed ankles and crap like that, and address paraphilia.

I'm assuming that you, like pretty much every other college kid out there, took the basic psych 101 class, in which they discuss sexual deviance? Yeah, that's where paraphilias are. Paraphilias are essentially sexual addictions. They're a sexual fascination with something that is not associated with the normal modes of sexual reproduction. Someone uber puritan out there might want to lump oral sex into that, but pretty much as long as we've had any records of sexual behavior, oral sex has been in the mix and very common.

Some paraphilias are fairly benign in the grand scheme - having a foot fetish, for example, is unlikely to cause problems to anyone else. At worst, it might make it really challenging for the person with that paraphilia to find a partner, or it could hamper their ability to have a healthy sexual relationship, one where both parties gain pleasure and satisfaction in a mutually beneficial and respectful way. Others, like pedophila, are quite malign. They represent a risk to innocent minors.

People with paraphilias, like addicts, tend to seek gratification of their addiction. They seek out a means to attain sexual satisfaction related to their paraphilia. A pedophile seeks to be around kids, even if they're not actively looking to abuse them. They seek out sexualized imagery of kids, they fantasize about sexual acts with children. The same thing holds for any other paraphilia - including bondage, sadism, masochism, foot fetishes, and transvestism.

And just like addictions, the more you feed the paraphilia, the stronger it becomes. You can't conquer an opioid addiction by giving people ever increasing amounts of oxy - there is no amount that is "enough" to satisfy the addiction. In some cases, a person can manage their addiction to a degree - you get "functional" alcoholics and heroin addicts, who can maintain their lives with more or less the same amount of booze or horse to get by. But it's not a happy place, it's just endurance. And that maintenance level frequently ends up being right about the maximum amount that can be used without permanent harm, it's essentially the saturation level. So the more a pedophile spends time around kids, the stronger their pedophilia becomes. Some might be able to find a balance of sorts, where they get enough exposure to get by without actually harming a kid, but it's always an uneasy balance. Similarly, transvestites might find balance if they have a means to get just enough cross-dressing titillation, but there's always a hunger for a bit more.

More than that, however, is that paraphilias cluster and propagate in a way analogous to addictions. A person with one drug addiction is at materially increased risk of developing a second (or third or fourth... ) addiction. Some people might have a "favorite" drug, but the reality is that a drug addict is likely to use more drugs of more types. They cluster and multiply. The same thing is true of paraphilias - if a person has one paraphilia, they're at significantly higher risk of developing another paraphilia.

Drug addicts have a tendency to escalate into theft, robbery, mugging, and other criminal behavior. They have a tendency to lose jobs, and become homeless. Paraphiliacs have a tendency to escalate too - voyeurism and exhibitionism are some of the more common paraphilias, and they're correlated with increased risk of sexual offending - stalking, harassment, sexual assault, rape. There's a disproportionate prevalence of paraphilias among serial killers and serial rapists than among the general population. Transvestism is far overrepresented among serial killers, for instance.

Not every paraphiliac is a risk to others, just like not every alcoholic is a risk to others. But just like with alcohol, they absolutely represent an increased risk. And the more extreme the paraphilia, the higher the risk.

A person who openly engages in cross-dressing and "age play" in public is indicative of a higher risk of sexual predation to those around them. That's why other people care about "perversion".

 

[Emily's Cat]

I always condemn anyone that brings violence to a peaceful protest, but none in that story were a side I support. Are you having a bit of a moment or something?

You weren't paricularly shy about voicing your condemnation when you thought it was the women's rights advocates who brought the violence. You're notably sanguine about the violence coming from the trans side.

Actually, you've had a lot of censorious commentary for those who are voicing positions supporting female rights. Perhaps I've missed it, but I don't recall you sharing any sort of opprobrium toward trans activists in this thread.

 

[Rolfe]

If you and others argue in bad faith, as you have done many, many times, I will absolutely accuse you of such. You found me to be breifly arguing in bad faith once and you all had collective multiple orgasms over it.

You catch me trolling once and you think your off the hook for your dishonesty of the past, present, and future? Gotta hand it to you, you're one of a kind.

Eta: regarding your 'evasion noted': it was a stupid question. I acknowledged I misread, and that I trolled the ◊◊◊◊ out of it afterwards. So why would I have anything further to say?

You, on the other hand, have a year long backlog of posts I have criticized that you have yet to show the integrity to address.

You were bang to rights, and tried every sort of back-flip and evasion known to man to avoid acknowledging this.

I will repeat. I have no intention of bandying words with you when you announce that something I have posted for discussion is a lie or a fabrication because you don't like the content, and/or the source of the story. Your increasingly desperate flailing to find some way to deny the reality of some absolutely sickening behaviour of men who pretend to be women is absolutely unedifying, and I will not be engaging with that.

 

[theprestige]

Alright, let's have a bit of real talk about "perversion". Let's go ahead and set aside the figurative framing wrapped up in prudery about exposed ankles and crap like that, and address paraphilia.

I'm assuming that you, like pretty much every other college kid out there, took the basic psych 101 class, in which they discuss sexual deviance? Yeah, that's where paraphilias are. Paraphilias are essentially sexual addictions. They're a sexual fascination with something that is not associated with the normal modes of sexual reproduction. Someone uber puritan out there might want to lump oral sex into that, but pretty much as long as we've had any records of sexual behavior, oral sex has been in the mix and very common.

Some paraphilias are fairly benign in the grand scheme - having a foot fetish, for example, is unlikely to cause problems to anyone else. At worst, it might make it really challenging for the person with that paraphilia to find a partner, or it could hamper their ability to have a healthy sexual relationship, one where both parties gain pleasure and satisfaction in a mutually beneficial and respectful way. Others, like pedophila, are quite malign. They represent a risk to innocent minors.

People with paraphilias, like addicts, tend to seek gratification of their addiction. They seek out a means to attain sexual satisfaction related to their paraphilia. A pedophile seeks to be around kids, even if they're not actively looking to abuse them. They seek out sexualized imagery of kids, they fantasize about sexual acts with children. The same thing holds for any other paraphilia - including bondage, sadism, masochism, foot fetishes, and transvestism.

And just like addictions, the more you feed the paraphilia, the stronger it becomes. You can't conquer an opioid addiction by giving people ever increasing amounts of oxy - there is no amount that is "enough" to satisfy the addiction. In some cases, a person can manage their addiction to a degree - you get "functional" alcoholics and heroin addicts, who can maintain their lives with more or less the same amount of booze or horse to get by. But it's not a happy place, it's just endurance. And that maintenance level frequently ends up being right about the maximum amount that can be used without permanent harm, it's essentially the saturation level. So the more a pedophile spends time around kids, the stronger their pedophilia becomes. Some might be able to find a balance of sorts, where they get enough exposure to get by without actually harming a kid, but it's always an uneasy balance. Similarly, transvestites might find balance if they have a means to get just enough cross-dressing titillation, but there's always a hunger for a bit more.

More than that, however, is that paraphilias cluster and propagate in a way analogous to addictions. A person with one drug addiction is at materially increased risk of developing a second (or third or fourth... ) addiction. Some people might have a "favorite" drug, but the reality is that a drug addict is likely to use more drugs of more types. They cluster and multiply. The same thing is true of paraphilias - if a person has one paraphilia, they're at significantly higher risk of developing another paraphilia.

Drug addicts have a tendency to escalate into theft, robbery, mugging, and other criminal behavior. They have a tendency to lose jobs, and become homeless. Paraphiliacs have a tendency to escalate too - voyeurism and exhibitionism are some of the more common paraphilias, and they're correlated with increased risk of sexual offending - stalking, harassment, sexual assault, rape. There's a disproportionate prevalence of paraphilias among serial killers and serial rapists than among the general population. Transvestism is far overrepresented among serial killers, for instance.

Not every paraphiliac is a risk to others, just like not every alcoholic is a risk to others. But just like with alcohol, they absolutely represent an increased risk. And the more extreme the paraphilia, the higher the risk.

A person who openly engages in cross-dressing and "age play" in public is indicative of a higher risk of sexual predation to those around them. That's why other people care about "perversion".

There's three more reasons why other people should care.

One is that when a man goes out in public dressed like a sexualized toddler, he's involving the rest of us in his kink without our consent.

A second reason is that he is trying to normalize the outward signs of his kink and his perversion.

And the third reason, stemming from the second, is that such normalization poisons the general perception of toddlers and toddlerhood, with sexual connotations and inferences. Society as a whole becomes more perverted, as a result of this normalization.

 

[Thermal]

You were bang to rights, and tried every sort of back-flip and evasion known to man to avoid acknowledging this.

That's a lie. I have come clean, and repeatedly. You should try it some time.

I will repeat. I have no intention of bandying words with you when you announce that something I have posted for discussion is a lie or a fabrication because you don't like the content, and/or the source of the story.

I have not asked you to. I have challenged the factual accuracy of the tweetys you post, and you change the subject if you reply at all.

Your increasingly desperate flailing to find some way to deny the reality of some absolutely sickening behaviour of men who pretend to be women is absolutely unedifying, and I will not be engaging with that.

I have not once defended sickening behavior. That's another lie. My only argument here is to discuss a way to be true to respecting a small minority, and when met with some pretty sickening arguments from your side, I push back against them.

Eta: and what are you doing up in the middle of the night, anyway?

 

[Emily's Cat]

I have not once defended sickening behavior.

You were rather vocal about insisting that autogynephilia is no big deal, totally just fine, and nothing for anyone to be worried about at all, and we're all just bigots for viewing it as a problem for females to be forcibly included in some male's live-action sex play.